SQUIRE 2.0 (<i>Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence)</i>: revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process: Table 1

Ogrinc, Greg; Davies, Louise; Goodman, Daisy; Batalden, Paul B.; Davidoff, Frank; Stevens, David P.

doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411

Cited by 1,591 publications

(705 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

691

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Alongside these, we would also emphasise that rigorous conduct and transparent reporting (regardless of 'success' or 'failure') are essential. Reporting guidelines such as Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) 38 with its focus on explaining 'Why did you start? ', 'What did you do?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesSocial prescribing is a way of linking patients in primary care with sources of support within the community to help improve their health and well-being. Social prescribing programmes are being widely promoted and adopted in the UK National Health Service and so we conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence for their effectiveness.Setting/data sourcesNine databases were searched from 2000 to January 2016 for studies conducted in the UK. Relevant reports and guidelines, websites and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies. All the searches were restricted to English language only.ParticipantsSystematic reviews and any published evaluation of programmes where patient referral was made from a primary care setting to a link worker or facilitator of social prescribing were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias for included studies was undertaken independently by two reviewers and a narrative synthesis was performed.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcomes of interest were any measures of health and well-being and/or usage of health services.ResultsWe included a total of 15 evaluations of social prescribing programmes. Most were small scale and limited by poor design and reporting. All were rated as a having a high risk of bias. Common design issues included a lack of comparative controls, short follow-up durations, a lack of standardised and validated measuring tools, missing data and a failure to consider potential confounding factors. Despite clear methodological shortcomings, most evaluations presented positive conclusions.ConclusionsSocial prescribing is being widely advocated and implemented but current evidence fails to provide sufficient detail to judge either success or value for money. If social prescribing is to realise its potential, future evaluations must be comparative by design and consider when, by whom, for whom, how well and at what cost.Trial registration numberPROSPERO Registration: CRD42015023501.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 In contrast, more recent international guidance on designing, conducting and writing up improvement projects highlights the importance of describing how improvement interventions change. 7 In brief, a number of themes relating to the design of effective interventions are emerging in the literature.…”

Section: What the Literature Suggests We Should Have Donementioning

confidence: 99%

What we know about designing an effective improvement intervention (but too often fail to put into practice)

Marshall

Silva²,

Cruickshank

et al. 2016

BMJ Qual Saf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This quality improvement education project was performed in adherence to the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines [18]. All SQUIRE 2.0 items were considered and included in the current manuscript.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Development of the TORS curriculum and its assessment were performed in adherence to the Standard for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) 2.0 guidelines [18]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Assessment of a Transoral Robotic Surgery Curriculum to Train Otolaryngology Residents

White

Sharma²

2018

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of the Study: (1) To develop a multifaceted didactic and hands-on curriculum to prepare otolaryngology residents to perform transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and safely transition to the operating room. (2) To assess the effectiveness of the TORS curriculum. Procedures: Learning objectives were developed and a curriculum was formulated utilizing five unique modalities: focused didactic reading, online training modules, backpack console simulations, videos of TORS cases, and hands-on cadaveric dissections with the robotic surgical system in a simulated operating room. The trainees completed a nine-item self-assessment of their skill level using a Likert scale. Results: Five senior otolaryngology residents completed the TORS curriculum. Before and after the cadaveric dissections, there was improvement in each of the nine items assessed. Composite scores were calculated and there was significant improvement from predissection (15.2 ± 2.2) to postdissection (31.4 ± 1.9) (p = 0.002). Conclusions: The current study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a multifaceted TORS curriculum which incorporates robotic cadaveric dissection for otolaryngology residents. Residents demonstrate marked improvement in skills with the TORS curriculum. A TORS curriculum which includes robotic cadaveric dissection can improve surgical skills and serve as a key component of residency TORS education.

show abstract

SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process: Table 1

Cited by 1,591 publications

References 19 publications

Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

What we know about designing an effective improvement intervention (but too often fail to put into practice)

Development and Assessment of a Transoral Robotic Surgery Curriculum to Train Otolaryngology Residents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About